Spencer Heath Archive

Item 1322

Carbon of a letter to Alexander Colin Campbell, Apartment 3, 24 Lisgar Street, Ottawa, Canada

January 11, 1941

 

 

Dear Mr. Campbell:

 

     It is a great pleasure to get your interesting letter of January 7th.

     This Summer and Fall I was twice in Toronto and twice in Montreal during which visits I had you very much in mind, and sincerely regretted not being able to come over to Ottawa to see you. I still hope for that pleasure in the not too distant future.

     I appreciate your kind thoughts on my attempts to develop a Science of Society. I feel that Henry George laid a negative as well as a positive foundation for the Science of Society. In its negative aspect, he proposed the political technique of compulsive law for the state appropriation of rent and land values. This might be called the Old Testament of Henry George. It involves a compulsive technique something like “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” In his New Testament he proposes an emancipation, a service technique, “To abolish all taxation save that on land values.” This great service of emancipation, like all services, will draw forth its own recompense and, thus, create its own value.

     Henry George proposed a service of emancipation to the productive elements of society, but he did not propose that this community service and protection should be the particular duty of any particular interest or class, and he did not contemplate that anyone would be recompensed for the service of abolishing taxation and, thus, establishing freedom. He knew that if beneficial services were performed for a community, the land owners would receive the recompense for these services in rents and values that the services would create. Curiously, it did not occur to him that the fact of their reaping the recompense for community services logically establishes the land owners as the appropriate officers and agents for the procurement of public relief and the performance of public services.

     Since seeing you in New York I have gotten out two additional circulars, both covering the same subject matter. The shorter one in the form of a series of questions being introductory to the more complete discussion set forth in the other. You will note that they both bear the same general title. I hope you will find these interesting and come to regard them as of great possible value in pointing the way to a peaceable, non-compulsive and automatic adoption of the practical proposition of Henry George, “To abolish all taxation save that on land value.” I am quite in earnest in my belief that when more fully understood, the proposition of Henry George will prove itself to be self-enacting and self-liquidating upon the principle of freedom — of services freely performed and freely recompensed in the silent and automatic democracy of the market.

     Please do me the favor to examine the matter of social freedom and emancipation from taxation from the standpoint that I have taken in these recent booklets, and give me the benefit of your reflections upon it, together with the mental reactions of any other competent minds whom you may possibly consult.

     I would particularly like to have your comment, analysis or rejoinder of the matter I set out in a letter to the Director of the Henry George School and an amplification of the letter attached. I am sending a carbon copy of this letter for your perusal and in the hope that you will find it of interest and possibly great importance and value.

     I regret very much to say that I have read none of Stephen Leacock’s full volumes, but I have read many of his articles in newspapers and magazines. He is most stimulating and most delightful. I would have loved to know him and I look forward to reading him more. I might say that this Summer and Fall I had two most interesting visits at McGill University. In connection with my earlier visit, I had an opportunity of presenting my ideas on proprietary administration of community services to a very attentive and appreciative group at the Faculty Club. It was commented that my presentation of the positive philosophy of Henry George (unlike that of some of my predecessors) did not provoke any resistance or opposition but only the most interested comment and inquiry. During my later visit, I was asked to address a Senior Faculty Organization known as the “Holy of Holies,” a special meeting of which was called for the purpose by its president, Dr. 0. L. Huskins, Head of the Department of Genetics. I was much gratified at the reception my ideas received and the whole evening of discussion until midnight that followed.

     My visits to Toronto and Montreal were most encouraging and most delightful. In Toronto one of the luncheon dates was changed for my benefit, and I had great pleasure in meeting and exchanging ideas with Mr. H.B. Cowan, of Peterborough, Mr. Farmer and Mr. Thompson and Mr. Ross, their new president. In Montreal I was most delightfully received by some four different circles of new acquaintance including, of course; Miss Bateman, Mr. and Mrs. Gillet, Miss Walton, Mr. Walsh and Dr. and Mrs. Palmquist, of the Henry George Group. I was sorry not to see Mr. Anderson. On my first visit he was away, and on my return he was too ill to be seen. I understand he has since greatly improved and hope he has entirely recovered before now. I was very much in hopes of seeing Mr. Herbert T. Owens in Toronto, but on account of his being transferred to a position in Ottawa, I was unable to do so. Please remember me to him and give him my very best regards, if you have the opportunity.

     It was a great pleasure to hear from you, and I look forward to that pleasure again. Miss Leighton joins me in my very best wishes for your health and happiness and many New Years.

Sincerely,

 

Spencer Heath

 

SH:ML

Enc.

“Questions for the Consideration of Land Owners”

“The Administration of Property as Community Services”

“Letter to Mr. Chodorov and amplification, “Society and

its Services.”